Ashburton Guardian Magna est Veritas et Prævalebit. MONDAY, JULY 23, 1917. FARMERS AND LABOUR.

Ashburton Guardian, Volume XXXVII, Issue 9051, 23 July 1917, Page 4

Ashburton Guardian Magna est Veritas et Prævalebit. MONDAY, JULY 23, 1917. FARMERS AND LABOUR.

Tiie opinion was expressed by the. chairman and a member of the Otago ~No. 2 Military Appeal Board, last week, that if farmers were prepared to pay for it, there was any amount of skilled farm labour obtainable. A farmer member of one of the Auckland boards endorsed this view, and added that one of the principal reasons why farmers could not get workers—either married or single—was the absence of suitable accommodation on many farms. The Council of Agriculture appears to realise that action is; necessary with regard to accommodation, for at its conference in Wellington last week it devoted a good deal of time to the' subject, and eventually passed the following resolution :— " That this conference urges the Government to introduce vsome simple system of providing financial assistance to enable farmers to erect cottages on their farms for married workers." Mr W. Hunt was the sponsor of this proposal, and he contended that if it was adopted it would benefit the workers, the farmers, and the State in equal 'proportions, because it wbuld stimulate production. He quoted figures showing; that there were iii the- Dominion 20,000 farmers who each employed on ah average two workers, and 30,000 who did not employ any labour. It is an open question whether^the 30,000 farmers do not employ labour because they cannot' aiford to build homes for farm hands, or whether they are farming !on so small a scale that they ha^e no need for outside help. ' i'tissij&iy both :of these,factora;'6btijatt 1;!,.ta v.'a certain degree, and it would be necessary for the Government to ascertain whether financial help m building would result in creating a greater uemand for iarin workers and therefore' increased production. Most of the members of the conference favoured the proposal, but Mr i 3. liolton said Unit farmers sliouid deal ■witii -tins matter themselves, and not ask tne uovernnient to help tnein. it is uoubtfui whether many small farmers will welcome the suggestion. &onie of tiiein have conservative ideas with regard to tne needs of workers, and the accommodation they provide is extremely primitive. This is due in some casevS to restricted finances, and in others to the quite mistaken idea that a roof, a bed, and the plainest of food are all that an employer-can be expected to provide. Such conditions, plus a 10- or 12-hour day, offer no attractions to men who can earn better wages, even as labourers, and with less effort, in the cities and towns, where, also, they can enjoy the "amenities of civilisation" that are lacking in some country districts. I*1'* l/'rom the State's viewpoint, the whole question is one of practicability. The financial aspect is a secondary consideration, for if the State can be convinced that by assisting farmers to build homes for workers more men would be available for agricultural and other farming operations, it would probably be an easy matter to arrange the details. Indeed, .such a scheme might with advantage i take the place of the Workers' Dwellings Act, the operation, of which is now regarded as somewhat doubtful in utility. It is claimed that one effect of the Act has been to cause a partial stoppage in the erection Jby speculators of houses that could be let at reasonable/rentals. A few fortunate individuals have secure 1 houses on most advantageous terms, but the would-be tenants of State-built houses can be numbered in thousands. Far greater practical results would be obtained by providing homes for farm workers. One of the chief problems the Government will have to face when the war is over will be the stimulation of production, from the soil, and an essential to this end is a large.agrarian population, who will need better in- , ducements than are now offered', to take up faxm work.